D&D General Rethinking alignment yet again

[Cadence]

I am baffled by this statement as it seems to be straight up nonsense. Yes, in D&D there is an objective answer to what is meant by "Good". But having an objective answer for what is good does not solve many or even any moral dilemmas. So this is fundamentally obvious and I've explained why it doesn't solve any moral dilemmas so much in this thread that I'm at a loss how you can assert your claim axiomatically without any attempt to defend it. I feel like you are fighting over the label and not any normative, ethical or moral claims. Are you just offended that something is called "Good"? Is the label so important to claim?

If it's not important, why does it need to be given to the powers in the game?

So, what's your favorite moral quandary when an oracle of a supreme being can tell you which of two choices is more good/less evil?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I am baffled by this statement as it seems to be straight up nonsense. Yes, in D&D there is an objective answer to what is meant by "Good". But having an objective answer for what is good does not solve many or even any moral dilemmas. So this is fundamentally obvious and I've explained why it doesn't solve any moral dilemmas so much in this thread that I'm at a loss how you can assert your claim axiomatically without any attempt to defend it. I feel like you are fighting over the label and not any normative, ethical or moral claims. Are you just offended that something is called "Good"? Is the label so important to claim?

This results the bizarre interpretation that "Good" is not good. Which indeed would be what a lot of people would think in a world with alignment detection. But I don't see such childishly simplistic moral frameworks, let alone codifying them in the rules in manner that forces the characters to deal with them, adding of anything of value. Instead they're just a hindrance for proper examination of morals and a source of semantic confusion.

 

[RuinousPowers]

I am baffled by this statement as it seems to be straight up nonsense. Yes, in D&D there is an objective answer to what is meant by "Good". But having an objective answer for what is good does not solve many or even any moral dilemmas. So this is fundamentally obvious and I've explained why it doesn't solve any moral dilemmas so much in this thread that I'm at a loss how you can assert your claim axiomatically without any attempt to defend it. I feel like you are fighting over the label and not any normative, ethical or moral claims. Are you just offended that something is called "Good"? Is the label so important to claim?

There is no "moral dilemma" when there is a clear and definitive answer about what is moral. If the "trolley problem" has been answered 100% in regard to good and evil, law and chaos, then there is no dilemma.

 

[Maxperson]

This is honestly the first time I've noticed those are customizable.

Name titles?

 

[Maxperson]

It as an attempt to provide a non-political example of the very real issue people want to bury and ignore: that alignment's primary effect is to impose a morality over the game.

That is no longer true, though. In 5e it's just a roleplaying aid with no teeth. It literally can't impose anything on anyone.

 

[Vaalingrade]

A heavy clasp, wrought to look like angel wings, keeps the book’s contents secure. Only a creature of good alignment that is attuned to the book can release the clasp that holds it shut. Once the book is opened, the attuned creature must spend 80 hours reading and studying the book to digest its contents and gain its benefits. Other creatures that peruse the book’s open pages can read the text but glean no deeper meaning and reap no benefits. An evil creature that tries to read from the book takes 24d6 radiant damage. This damage ignores resistance and immunity, and can’t be reduced or avoided by any means. A creature reduced to 0 hit points by this damage disappears in a blinding flash and is destroyed, leaving its possessions behind.

Quoth the Book of Exalted Deeds item for Dungeons and Dragons 5th Edition.

So... how does one determine who gets to open the book and who gets unfairnessed to death?

 

[Maxperson]

Having a person force you to deal with their interpretations of morality in what is supposed to be a leisure activity, and having the ability to punish you, through your character, is not fun. A DM who strongly believes in Gygax's alignment definitions and demands you either kill goblin children or you lose your character that required a great deal of luck to get, is not fun. Or in 5e having everyone just treat you as evil for not killing goblin children would not be fun either.

What ability to punish? Alignment quite literally has no teeth. The DM disagrees with the alignment you've chosen, so what. There's nothing he can do. Even if he oversteps and says, "You aren't NG, you're CG." Well, okay. Continue acting the same way and keep the NG on your sheet.

 

[Maxperson]

Quoth the Book of Exalted Deeds item for Dungeons and Dragons 5th Edition.

So... how does one determine who gets to open the book and who gets unfairnessed to death?

Nobody gets unfairnessed to death unless the DM screwed up and gave you that book at low level. At worst it's going to be, "Ow, quit it!" and you sell it for lots of money and get something else. It's also so exceedingly rare as to not be worth consideration in an alignment debate. Alignment is about how your PC is roleplayed. Nothing else really matters, including the DM's opinion.

 

[Cadence]

What ability to punish? Alignment quite literally has no teeth. The DM disagrees with the alignment you've chosen, so what. There's nothing he can do. Even if he oversteps and says, "You aren't NG, you're CG." Well, okay. Continue acting the same way and keep the NG on your sheet.

Is this a 5e thread or a D&D general thread?

Edit: Nevermind. saw the item was 5e

 

[Celebrim]

If it's not important, why does it need to be given to the powers in the game?

I didn't say it wasn't important? What are you even responding to?

So, what's your favorite moral quandary when an oracle of a supreme being can tell you which of two choices is more good/less evil?

There are no supreme beings in D&D. You're approaching polytheism from the standpoint of a monotheist. In D&D there are gods, sometimes explicitly even the Greek Gods depending on the campaign. These Gods represent different beliefs and values and so while they can tell you what is more Good or less Evil, they can't tell you why you ought to be Good and not Evil. Each of them can offer an argument as to why you ought to agree with them, but none of them can prove that they are right. So if Asmodeus comes to you and says, "Do this thing for me and I'll reward you", the moral question is not whether Asmodeus is Good - because no one claims he is, but whether one ought to do it. People aren't evil in the D&D world merely because they have twirly mustaches and kick puppies. They have intellectual reasons for being Evil that have to do with how you view the world. I mean sure, we can in D&D define Good as an alignment that wants to protect the weak and prevent suffering, but even knowing that is Good doesn't tell you why you ought to do that. It could be that it's stupid to protect the weak and prevent suffering. Certainly many beings in the D&D world (and some in the real world) feel the same.